tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post4929714136477151997..comments2024-03-27T03:19:11.216-04:00Comments on Assistant Village Idiot: Advantage: MarriageAssistant Village Idiothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-8088933974978407662013-10-21T22:25:26.201-04:002013-10-21T22:25:26.201-04:00Yes, not adjusting for adoption - in general, not ...Yes, not adjusting for adoption - in general, not just of minorities or disabled children - weakens the whole deal. With that small a sample size, a few could make a big difference.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-86782308338266880832013-10-21T07:37:16.164-04:002013-10-21T07:37:16.164-04:00It seems the children of gay parents are more ofte...It seems the children of gay parents are more often of minorities and have more disabilities. I suppose you could adjust for that but research of that kind is mainly to prove that it's good or bad rather than finding the truth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-65175995543482434292013-10-19T17:56:47.307-04:002013-10-19T17:56:47.307-04:00FYI, I'm pretty sure that the data is response...FYI, I'm pretty sure that the data is responses to the 2011 National Household Survey. The questions which were asked are here:<br /><br />http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/NHS-ENM/ref/Questionnaires/2011NHS-ENM-eng.cfmDouglas2https://www.blogger.com/profile/11290012200563917585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-61880663143835800092013-10-19T15:26:27.405-04:002013-10-19T15:26:27.405-04:00Thank you. The link does indeed focus on things th...Thank you. The link does indeed focus on things that <i>might possibly be wrong with the data</i> without providing evidence that these limitations are true, then dismissing the study as worthless and dishonest. In the discussion of the odds ratio, the true statement that a comparison of 96% to 99% graduation rate would be more dramatic according to that measure rather ignores the fact that we aren't talking about graduation rates near that high, so why choose those numbers? Easy. Distraction. <br /><br />The writer can't be held responsible for the stupidity of the commenters who went quickly to the "Bigots!" mode. Yet neither is there any note of cautioning them away from such.<br /><br />Woolley's criticisms are indeed better, and provide the proper note of doubt, I think.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-77692615703108737702013-10-19T14:57:40.859-04:002013-10-19T14:57:40.859-04:00I'm providing a link below (courtesy of commen...I'm providing a link below (courtesy of comments at iSteve) where there is criticism of the study.<br /><br />Much of it is of the "of course this is wrong, we just have to figure out how it is wrong so that we have talking points against it" variety. Most of the limitations pointed out are limitations of the data set, so it is not as if they have the means to do any better.<br /><br />But one commenter Frances Woolley has criticisms of the paper that are cogent, real, and on-topic. <br /><br />This is not to say that the paper is wrong, or absolutely right. <br /><br /><br />http://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/the-douglas-allen-study-of-canadian-children-of-gaylesbian-parents-is-worthless/Douglas2https://www.blogger.com/profile/11290012200563917585noreply@blogger.com